Psychologically speaking, internalizing that message can be tremendously destabilizing.

I hope people don’t take that study as the final word in this field. After all, doctors and scientists have gone back & forth about memories – including young children’s memories – for decades. This is just the latest breakthrough, and its relevance will be proved over time. For now, it’s startling, so it’s in national (USA) news.

And lf course, the Mandela Effect is a sub-sub-category of memories, in general. They’re anomalies we don’t fully understand… yet.

I’m posting this because it may be important to compartmentalize memories by categories. I don’t mean just two bins: the Mandela Effect, and Everything Else.

Instead, I’m talking about the myriad kinds of memories we have – how strong they are, when and where we acquired them, how they connect to one another, and so on.

Too often, I read comments and emails from people with one or two Mandela Effect memories, and they regularly close with a line like, “Am I losing my mind?” or “Am I going crazy?”

It worries me that they may be serious about those concerns: They’re worried that the memories they feel certain of… may be false, and – to them – that becomes a systemic concern. They awfulize. They wonder, “Okay, what else am I wrong about…?”

That’s not something anyone can evaluate, online. Not even me. (Yes, I’m being flippant; obviously, I’m not a mental health expert. But, I am absolutely serious about my concerns when I read news headlines that could tilt the scales dangerously, among people who are already feeling troubled.)

So, my post today is to assure you that this latest study doesn’t mean all – or any – of your memories are dangerously flawed.

I’ve already talked about the importance of fact-checking memories that don’t quite fit the world we’re in. That’s in my video, shown below.

But, having ruled out confusion, etc., I think it’s important not to internalize news stories that could be destabilizing.

Sure, if you need to talk with a professional – a doctor, for example – please do that for your peace of mind.

Meanwhile, I still say “trust your memories.” Whether their factual content is accurate or not, they came from somewhere. And that “somewhere” may have been mistaken.

If so, that’s human error. It doesn’t mean you’re losing your mind… it just means you heard whatever-it-was from someone who misspoke, or was working with flawed information (possibly through no fault of their own).

Or, yes, it could be the Mandela Effect.

(Have a comment? Comments will be open for one week, and manually approved by me, usually once a day.)

Well, you might have gone forward in time – a day, a year, or another short leap that wouldn’t seem obviously out-of-sync with present time.

Let’s say that’s what happened to those of us who remembered Nelson Mandela dying before 2013.

Maybe, staring at the TV back in 1988 (or whenever), we “slid” forward to 2013 and saw Mandela’s funeral on TV.

A blink (perhaps literally) later, we were whisked back to 1988… and went out to the kitchen for a snack from the refrigerator.

In our minds, Mandela had died. We felt sad, but knew his health had been shaky after a hunger strike in prison.

After that, each of us got caught up in school or work or other daily activities. We didn’t think anything about the funeral… until, one day, Nelson Mandela was on the TV. And he wasn’t dead.

It seemed like a “what the ____?” moment, but we figured we must have been mistaken. (That didn’t make sense, because the memory was so clear, but… well, what other explanation could there be?)

And then, in 2009 or so, we discovered that others remembered Mandela’s earlier death. Many of them remembered the exact same details as we did, too. (Cue the “Twilight Zone” music? That’s how it felt, to me.)

And sure, you could use this same scenario for memories like the Berenstain/Berenstein Bears, Jif/Jiffy peanut butter, the number of US states, and so on.

All of them could be explained as time travel so brief, we didn’t even notice it. (Okay, some alternate history memories fit that concept better than others. I still resist the idea that the Mandela Effect has a one-size-fits-all explanation.)

Tamara told the BBC, “something out there is having an anti-gravity effect, it’s pushing rather than pulling. We don’t know what that is, but it makes up most of the Universe. We call it dark energy.”

“By understanding this mysterious energy, we could be a step closer to time travel. It’s thought that dark energy may be the key to manipulating a wormhole and taking advantage of its route to another point in time.”

I was also intrigued by a reference by Johannes Handsteiner, talking about quantum entanglement.

Einstein, who hated the notion, called this “spooky action at a distance” and defined it as two particles behaving as one no matter how far apart they are.

Those are just a few interesting tidbits from that article. As a Mandela Effect researcher – and, like you, someone fascinated by possible explanations – I recommend reading it.

If you’re a time travel enthusiast, watch this short video. (If you’re confused, don’t worry. I kept pausing it and rewinding it, saying, “Wait, what…?” LOL)

In general, I haven’t a clue what’s causing the Mandela Effect. Time travel is as good a guess as any, and it’s among my favorites. (You may have better explanations. I’m constantly impressed by the theories that readers suggest.)

The Higgypop article sparked my interest, as some of its ideas were new to me.

Very late tonight (Monday, June 18/19), I’ll be a guest during the second half of George Noory’s radio show, Coast to Coast AM.

I expect to talk about the Mandela Effect, but also about other areas of paranormal research. The show will be recorded so you can listen to it later. (In the eastern US, my segment of Coast to Coast AM airs from 3 AM to 5 AM. I’m hoping to be awake enough to say the things I want to say… and not blurt things as I sometimes do when I’m tired.)

Physicists have confirmed the existence of a new form of atomic nuclei, and the fact that it’s not symmetrical challenges the fundamental theories of physics that explain our Universe.

“We’ve found these nuclei literally point towards a direction in space. This relates to a direction in time, proving there’s a well-defined direction in time and we will always travel from past to present,” Marcus Scheck from the University of the West of Scotland told Kenneth MacDonald at BBC News at the time.

…

According to the laws of physics, at the time of the Big Bang*, equal amounts of matter and antimatter had to have been created, but now, billions of years later, we’re surrounded by heaps of matter (solid, liquid, gas, and plasma), and there appears to be almost no naturally occurring antimatter.

“This is a puzzling feature, as the theory of relativistic quantum mechanics suggests we should have equal amounts of the two,” mathematician Gianluca Sarri from Queen’s University Belfast in the UK writes for The Conversation.

“In fact, no current model of physics can explain the discrepancy.”

…

It’s a pretty out-there hypothesis, but Scheck says that this uneven distribition of mass and charge causes Barium-144’s nucleus to ‘point’ in a certain direction in spacetime, and this bias could explain why time seems to only want to go from past to present, and not backwards, even if the laws of physics don’t care which way it goes.

Of course, there’s no way of proving that without further evidence, but the discovery is yet another indication that the Universe might not be as symmetrical as the Standard Model of Physics needs it to be, and proving that could usher us into a whole new era of theoretical physics.

This research intrigues me, because time travel (or time manipulation) has been part of many Mandela Effect conversations.

But, I’m anticipating at least one logical argument: Perhaps someone traveled back in time and planted the nuclei that suggest a one-way flow of time. If so, it’s an effective red herring – for now anyway.

Of course, creation, evolution, and “12th planet” histories are an entirely different topic from the Mandela Effect. But, such interesting and radical theories are emerging, I decided to alert you that “everyone knows” histories may be changing. In my opinion, they’re tilting in interesting directions.

Whether or not the possibility of time travel affects Mandela Effect theories – well, that’s another question. (And yes, I suppose the best answer is, “Only time will tell.”)

Instead, it might reflect how much you’ve tuned into pop culture, which can play fast-and-loose with facts, and deliberately misquote (or downright misrepresent) events and media, to avoid potential trademark liabilities.

But, if you’re looking for proof of the Mandela Effect, I’m sorry but I have none.

In fact, I’m skeptical when someone shows me a photo they claim is an actual Berenstein Bears book from their granny’s attic. Or a photo of a newspaper that has a headline confirming another Mandela Effect memory. Those things can be faked.

In my opinion, social proof is probably as good as it gets, for now.

Talk about your Mandela Effect memories. Find others who recall the same (or similar) things. When other people remember what you remember, and then add a few details you didn’t mention (perhaps on purpose), that’s when you’ll know “it’s not just you.”

Meanwhile, trust your memories. Don’t default to “I’m going crazy.” There are far too many people who’ll eagerly agree with you, and make things worse. Because: trolls and bullies.

They’re dealing with their own internal demons. Don’t let it become contagious.

The reality you’re in now… it’s where you are now. Just like traveling from one geographical area to another, where accents are different, people are still people. Your life isn’t going off the rails, even if several data points seem different where you are now.

Also, there’s no right/wrong in this. Someone who’s always remembered the children’s books as the Berenstain Bears, is simply someone who hasn’t traveled to the same realities you have.

Both of you are “right” in the context of your personal histories.

Trust your memories. No matter where they came from, and how different they are from the reality you’re in now, they’re still your memories. They’re part of who you are.

Try to look at the changes as, “Ooh, isn’t that interesting. Things are different here.” And then let it go.

But, when you meet someone with memories that match yours, I think it’s important to affirm them.

Mostly, I think it’s important to believe and trust your own memories. Once someone starts convincing you that your memories aren’t real… that’s a slippery slope to a very unhappy place.

Your memories are real. When you remember something like the Berenstein Bears books – or any of the other Mandela Effect memories that others share – and you talk about this with others, that’s when you’ll know.

A recent episode of the X-Files (reboot) uses the Mandela Effect as a story element.

I’m astonished. (That’s an understatement.) I never expected the Mandela Effect to attract so much attention.

Really, this still seems kind of surreal.

I haven’t seen the X-Files episode yet, but – from descriptions, such as the one at Hollywood Life – it sounds like a great parody.

(Should I be offended by their portrayal? It sounds zany, not insulting, and really, it’s just fiction and on TV, as well. I may change my opinion after I see the episode, but – for now – I’m chuckling.)

UPDATE

I watched the show (Season 11, Episode 4, “The Lost Art of Forehead Sweat”). I’m still chuckling. Yes, they were a little heavy handed with the political references. That was a surprise, since the show was broadcast on Fox. But, I’m aware that Fox and Fox News are independently managed.

But, putting politics firmly to one side (let’s not go there in comments), I was thoroughly pleased with the representation of the Mandela Effect. It was well-explained (well enough) and treated lightly.

To me, the shows seemed stylish and whimsical. I’m delighted. (This was the first time I’d ever watched an X-Files episode all the way through.)

I also loved the question left hanging at the end of that episode, about whether Reggie was a madman, or someone being silenced.

So, I’m pleased. For me, being the topic of an X-Files episode is about as close to a social “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval” as it gets. It moves Mandela Effect discussions further into the mainstream.

The more people talk about it – and weed out what’s true, what’s not, and what’s baffling – the closer we may get to understanding this phenomenon.

FREE T-SHIRT DESIGNS

Want to start a conversation about the Mandela Effect? A t-shirt could be useful.

These printable designs are already reversed so – as long as you have some variety of iron-on (transfer) paper – you can print the design, and then iron it onto your own t-shirts. Or whatever you like.

2.) and 3.) Instant Reality-Shift Translator – Two different iron-on designs. The first has Black letters (to print on light-colored fabric). The second has White letters (to print on black and dark-colored t-shirts).

(That t-shirt design does not say “Mandela Effect” on it, on purpose. It’s designed to spark conversations, but Mandela Effect fans will recognize it right away. Not quite a “secret handshake,” but not entirely obvious, either.)

The design is entirely in shades of white and grey. Whatever color shirt you iron it onto… that will be the color of the background and the lettering. (To show the design clearly, I’ve used a black background in the illustration above.) Click here to download the transparent GIF for DIY use.

Yes, to cover the hosting bill for this website, we’d already started creating new Mandela Effect t-shirt designs, mostly for fun, but also for people who don’t want to use the DIY versions. (Some are a little too finicky for DIY designs, too. It’s better to trust the professionals with them.)

Note: Comments on this post were open through early Feb 9th. They are now closed.

Friday marked the 50th anniversary of the original Star Trek’s “Mirror, Mirror” episode.

By NBC Television (eBay item photo front / photo back press release) [Public domain], via Wikimedia CommonsThough many of the characters were polar opposites of their prime reality selves, some continuity made the concept credible.